Government Related Information & Links

Links & information reflecting the Federal government's ongoing efforts to strip local governments and citizens of any power to defeat or even slow down, the installation of thousands of Cell Antennas, with virtually no government oversight or regulation:

Both Congress and the FCC have employed their powers to serve the wireless industry to an extent unparalled in American history.

As of 2011, the FCC, whose job is to protect the public, is instead employing all powers at its disposal, to assist the wireless industry in constructing as many Cell Towers and Cell Antennas as possible, as fast as possible, anywhere they choose, including atop public schools, free of virtually any government oversight or regulation.

To some, this is not the least surprising, considering the fact that between 1997 and 2005 alone, just eight of the country’s most powerful media and telecommunications companies, their corporate parents, and three of their trade groups, spent more than $400 million on political contributions and lobbying in Washington.

In a highly successful two-part power play, the wireless industry caused Congress to strip both state and local governments and citizens, of any power to challenge the installation of Cell Towers or Cell Antennas based upon adverse health effects, via the adoption of the Telecomunications Act of 1996.

Then, much to their delight, they were able to induce their friends at the FCC to adopt RF standards which permit RF emissions at levels as much as 5,000 times higher than the maximum levels deemed safe by other Countries.

Below is a report which details the amounts paid by the largest telecommunications companies for political contributions and lobbying monies in Washington. It further details how, during the same period, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 has been used to help the wireless industry, to the detriment of the American public:

The FCC (Federal Communications Commission) was established in 1934 as an "independent U.S. Government Agency" which operates under the direction of five Commissioners, lead by a Chairman. They are supposed to regulate, among other things, the wireless industry.

To hear Commissioners of the FCC speak, one would think they were payroll employees of the wireless industry, as opposed to having their salaries paid by U.S. Taxpayers.

It would be imposssible to convey in words the extent to which the fundamental function of the FCC has been perverted. Succinctly stated, the FCC has gone from regulating the wireless industry for the purpose of protecting the American public, to actually serving the industry they are supposed to be regulating.

The best way to present a clear picture of what the FCC is doing, is to simply provide you with the FCC Commissioner's own words, which speak volumes.

First and foremost are the words uttered by FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski at the FCC Spectrum Summit, on October 21, 2010 [summary below]. The only possible way Chairman Genachowski could have appeared as more of a cheerleader for the wireless industry, would be if he had worn a short skirt and carried pom-poms as he spoke.

It is clear that all five members of the Commission share a strong commitment to smart spectrum policy. Since the moment I arrived at the FCC, we have focused on the extraordinary opportunity of communications technology. That's why we put the time and effort into producing the most comprehensive and dynamic broadband plan in the world. One of the most important components of the National Broadband Plan is that it recognizes how central wireless broadband is to our future. Spectrum is what beams from the Cellular, Radio and TV towers and enables the mobile devices that have become increasingly essential to our daily lives. Though you can't see it, spectrum is the oxygen of our mobile communications infrastructure and the backbone of a growing percentage of our economy.

Consistent with their ongoing romance with the wireless industry, the Commissioners of the FCC have employed all means at their disposal to remove any and all obstacles which might, in any way, inhibit the wireless industry's efforts to install as many Cell Towers as possible, as fast as they can, anywhere they choose.

Simultaneously, the Commissioners have deliberately abstained from exercising any meaningful control or oversight over such towers, or what levels of RF emissions they are radiating into populated areas, including schools.

In fact, the FCC doesn't even know where most of the antennas are, much less what RF radiation is emanating from them.

By way of example, after the wireless industry complained to the FCC that local governments weren't granting applications to install Cell Towers fast enough, the Commissioners of the FCC imposed a "shot clock" [See our Q&A Section for details] requiring all local governments to decide Cell Tower applications within 150 days, or 90 days for co-locations.

To further assist the wireless industry, the Commissioners also explicitly provided that the wireless carriers can sue local governments if they don't decide Cell Tower applications within such deadlines set by the FCC. [See Below]

I should note that we reach today's ruling in response to a petition brought by CTIA, the wireless industry's trade association, and I would like to acknowledge CTIA's role in bringing this important issue to the Commission's attention.

Statement of FCC Chairman Julius Genachowskiissued in connection with FCC imposing a"shot clock" against local governments[Read Full Statement]

In a similar vein, when the wireless industry complained to the FCC that local utilities didn't greet, with open arms, the wireless industry's demands that they be given absolute and relatively cost-free access to all utility and telephone poles (to install Cell Antennas on them), the FCC "answered the call."[See Below]

But apparently, it wasn't good enough for the FCC to merely act at the beck and call of the wireless industry. To ensure that the hand of the wireless industry could reach into the fundamental policy-making decisions at the FCC, in 2010, the Commissioners caused the formation of the "Technological Advisory Counsel" to "provide counsel" to the FCC as to how to best regulate the wireless industry.

Who was chosen by the Commissioners to act as Chairman of the Counsel? Mr. Tom Wheeler, who previously served as CEO of the "Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association" and who "founded multiple companies offering cable, video and communications services."

The Order and Further Notice will make broadband more affordable and available by speeding and reducing the costs of access to an essential piece of infrastructure: utility poles. The order also established that (wireless companies) have a statutory right to timely access to (utility) poles.

O.K. so maybe the FCC is helping clear the way for the wireless carriers to install Cell Towers wherever they want, but they are probably regulating to ensure that they know where the towers are, and that they are safe, right?

Wrong. Regulating the towers which the FCC is helping the wireless industry to ram down our collective throats is not something the FCC does, nor has any interest in doing.

Consider the following series of questions and answers contained in an e-mail which a property owner sent to the FCC, and the response she received to same:

Q: "When I looked up on the FCC's database, towers of Charles Hayes from South Bend Indiana, I only located 4 licensed towers. Mr. Hayes stated that he has 40 towers. Why aren't all towers listed?"

Answer from the FCC: "Only towers above 200 feet tall are required to be registered with the FCC. However, even some that are that height or taller are not registered because the tower owners haven't provided the info to the FCC."

Comment: The majority of towers installed near populations and schools are between 100 and 199 feet in height, which means that the FCC has no idea where such towers are, and has neither the means, nor the inclination, to regulate them.

Q: "When new antennas are added to an existing tower does the FCC require notice or application of such antennas? If not, how would the FCC keep track of all the antennas on each tower?"

Answer from the FCC: "The FCC does not keep track of individual antennas on towers."

Comment: Alternatively stated, once a tower is up, the carriers could add as many antennas as they want, and the FCC wouldn't know, and would have no desire to find out.

Q: "When does the FCC actually check that each tower is within the guidelines?"

Answer from the FCC: "The FCC only checks if there is a complaint about a facility."

Comment: Since RF radiation cannot be "felt" it would be impossible for someone to know that the RF emissions are dangerously high, and concomitantly, it would be impossible for them to file a complaint for excessive radiation levels.

Q: "Does the FCC actually check the towers after additional antennas have been added to ensure the guidelines are being met?"

Answer from the FCC: "No, it is the licensee's responsibility to take into account the fields that are already existing before they add their antennas to the tower."

According to a research scientist from Princeton, the wireless industry was able to influence the FCC in adopting limitations for public exposure to RF/MW radiation. Not surprisingly, after over $400 million was spent on political contributions and lobbying, the FCC adopted "standards" which permit the American public to be exposed to RF radiation levels 10 to 5,000 times higher than what has been deemed safe in other Countries.

Report of Canadian Medical Officer of Health - After meeting with 300 public health officials from around the world to discuss the potential adverse impacts of RF emissions from Cell Towers, the Canadian Medical Officer of Health issued a report recommending that Canada reduce the permissible limit for Cell Tower RF radiation to 0.1 w/m2 - a level 5,800 times lower than what the FCC permits in the United States. [Read Report]

Video Explaining How the RF Emission Safety Standards in the U.S. are "Unrelated" to the Actual Dangers of RF Emissions, Especially With Regard to Causing Leukemia in Children. [Watch Video - 10:45]